From underdiagnosis to scalable screening: Applications of artificial intelligence for vertebral compression fracture detection – a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance

IF 2.4 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-14 DOI:10.1016/j.afos.2026.08.001
Hsuan-Yu Chen, Linjun Yang, Gwen Wilson, Milos Brkljac, Monty S. Khela, Kellen L. Mulford, Cody C. Wyles
{"title":"From underdiagnosis to scalable screening: Applications of artificial intelligence for vertebral compression fracture detection – a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance","authors":"Hsuan-Yu Chen,&nbsp;Linjun Yang,&nbsp;Gwen Wilson,&nbsp;Milos Brkljac,&nbsp;Monty S. Khela,&nbsp;Kellen L. Mulford,&nbsp;Cody C. Wyles","doi":"10.1016/j.afos.2026.08.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are common and often missed on routine imaging. We systematically reviewed the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence (AI) for VCF detection.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA 2020 and PROSPERO registration by searching Ovid Medline, Embase, and Central from January 1, 2020, to November 18, 2025, for studies using AI models for VCF detection and diagnosis. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2. Studies with complete 2 × 2 data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup analyses by modality.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Fifty-one studies were included. Thirty-seven contributed to meta-analysis with around 259 190 participants and 45,346 VCF patients. Original radiology reports missed &gt; 50% of incidental VCFs in many cohorts (up to 81%). The overall sensitivity of AI-assisted VCF detection was 85.0% (95% CI 84.2%–85.7%) and specificity 94.6% (95% CI 92.8%–95.9%). The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 15.4 and 0.16. At 22% pre-test probability, post-test probability was 77.7% after a positive AI result and 4.1% after a negative result. CT-based AI models performed best (sensitivity: 88.0%, specificity: 97.5%), while X-ray-based AI models showed lower sensitivity (79.2%) with high specificity (95.1%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>AI models demonstrate high diagnostic accuracy for VCF detection, particularly in CT imaging. However, improved detection alone does not ensure better outcomes, as substantial treatment gaps persist. The clinical impact of AI depends on rigorous prospective external validation and integration into structured osteoporosis care pathways, linking automated identification to timely evaluation and secondary fracture prevention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19701,"journal":{"name":"Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia","volume":"12 3","pages":"Pages 3-15"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405525526000476","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are common and often missed on routine imaging. We systematically reviewed the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence (AI) for VCF detection.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA 2020 and PROSPERO registration by searching Ovid Medline, Embase, and Central from January 1, 2020, to November 18, 2025, for studies using AI models for VCF detection and diagnosis. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2. Studies with complete 2 × 2 data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup analyses by modality.

Results

Fifty-one studies were included. Thirty-seven contributed to meta-analysis with around 259 190 participants and 45,346 VCF patients. Original radiology reports missed > 50% of incidental VCFs in many cohorts (up to 81%). The overall sensitivity of AI-assisted VCF detection was 85.0% (95% CI 84.2%–85.7%) and specificity 94.6% (95% CI 92.8%–95.9%). The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 15.4 and 0.16. At 22% pre-test probability, post-test probability was 77.7% after a positive AI result and 4.1% after a negative result. CT-based AI models performed best (sensitivity: 88.0%, specificity: 97.5%), while X-ray-based AI models showed lower sensitivity (79.2%) with high specificity (95.1%).

Conclusions

AI models demonstrate high diagnostic accuracy for VCF detection, particularly in CT imaging. However, improved detection alone does not ensure better outcomes, as substantial treatment gaps persist. The clinical impact of AI depends on rigorous prospective external validation and integration into structured osteoporosis care pathways, linking automated identification to timely evaluation and secondary fracture prevention.
从诊断不足到可扩展筛查:人工智能在椎体压缩性骨折检测中的应用-诊断性能的系统回顾和荟萃分析
目的椎体压缩性骨折(VCFs)是一种常见的常规影像学检查方法。我们系统地回顾了人工智能(AI)在VCF检测中的诊断性能。方法在2020年1月1日至2025年11月18日期间,通过检索Ovid Medline、Embase和Central,在PRISMA 2020和PROSPERO注册后,对使用AI模型检测和诊断VCF的研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析。采用QUADAS-2评估偏倚风险。采用随机效应荟萃分析对具有完整2x2数据的研究进行汇总,并按模态进行亚组分析。结果共纳入51项研究。37人参与了约259190名参与者和45346名VCF患者的荟萃分析。在许多队列中,原始放射学报告遗漏了50%的偶发vcf(高达81%)。人工智能辅助VCF检测的总体灵敏度为85.0% (95% CI 84.2% ~ 85.7%),特异性为94.6% (95% CI 92.8% ~ 95.9%)。正、负似然比分别为15.4和0.16。检测前概率为22%,阳性AI检测后概率为77.7%,阴性AI检测后概率为4.1%。基于ct的人工智能模型表现最佳(灵敏度为88.0%,特异性为97.5%),而基于x线的人工智能模型灵敏度较低(79.2%),特异性较高(95.1%)。结论sai模型对VCF的诊断具有较高的准确性,特别是在CT成像中。然而,仅仅改进检测并不能确保更好的结果,因为大量的治疗差距仍然存在。人工智能的临床影响取决于严格的前瞻性外部验证和整合到结构化骨质疏松症护理途径中,将自动识别与及时评估和二级骨折预防联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia
Osteoporosis and Sarcopenia Orthopedics, Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation, Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, Geriatrics and Gerontology
自引率
5.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
66 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书